6 Housing Conditions

6.1 Disrepair

The level of disrepair declined 5 percentage points in the
last year. In 2016, 68% of all dwellings had some degree of
disrepair, however minor it may be, down from 73% in 2015.
Disrepair to critical elements stood at 48%, 28% of dwellings had
some instances of urgent disrepair, and in 6% of the housing
stock some extensive disrepair was present. These also all
represent improvement compared to 2015 and continue a longer-term
trend of improvement.

Levels of damp and condensation remained similar to 2015
levels. Around 9 out of 10 properties were free from any damp or
condensation.

206. The
SHCS
measures disrepair for a wide range of building elements. This is
reported in four broad categories:

Any (or Basic) disrepair. This is the minimum
threshold of disrepair measured in the
SHCS
and relates to any damage where a building element requires some
repair beyond routine maintenance. It is the most comprehensive
category covering all types of disrepair, however minor, and
encompasses all other types of disrepair (see
Figure 29).

Extensive disrepair. To be described as
extensive, the damage must cover at least a fifth (20%) or more
of the building element area. This category is different from the
severity of damage as described by the next two categories,
urgent and critical, and can be applied to any of the other 3
categories of disrepair.

Urgent disrepair. This relates to cases
requiring immediate repair to prevent further damage or health
and safety risk to occupants. Urgency of disrepair is only
assessed for external and common elements.

Critical element disrepair. This refers to
disrepair to building elements central to weather-tightness,
structural stability and preventing deterioration of the
property. These elements are listed in
section 7.8.7.3. There is some overlap in
the building elements assessed under this category and those
assessed for urgent disrepair. Not all disrepair to critical
elements is necessarily considered urgent by the surveyor.

207. More detailed description of the categories of disrepair is
given in
section 7.8.7. Rates for each category for
the period 2013-2016 are shown in
Table 44.

208. The trend of improvements in levels of disrepair continued
in 2016. 68% of all dwellings had some degree of disrepair, however
minor it may be, down from 73% in 2015 and 81% in 2012. Disrepair
to critical elements stood at 48%, 28% of dwellings had some urgent
disrepair, and in 6% of the housing stock some extensive disrepair
was present.

Table 44: Rates of Disrepair by Category,
2012-2016

Year

Any (Basic) Disrepair

Disrepair to Critical Elements

Urgent Disrepair

Extensive Disrepair

No Disrepair

Some Disrepair

2016

32%

68%

48%

28%

6%

2015

27%

73%

52%

33%

8%

2014

27%

73%

53%

32%

7%

2013

22%

78%

57%

36%

7%

2012

19%

81%

61%

39%

9%

209. It is fairly common for dwellings to display elements of
disrepair in more than one category, as illustrated in
Figure 27. For example, we imagine a house
with several elements in disrepair of varying severity.

There is a leaking tap in the bathroom.

A large section of the render on an external wall has broken
off.

A small area of guttering is damaged, causing rain water to
pour down an external wall surface.

210. Following the guidance in the
SHCS
surveyor handbook, the leaking tap is recorded in the survey as a
minor repair. This alone is sufficient to place the house in the
category
any (or basic) disrepair.

211. The broken render on the external wall covers more than 20%
of the wall area. The surveyor does not consider the repair urgent.
However, the external wall finish is a critical element. This is
therefore recorded as both an
extensive disrepair and a disrepair to a
critical element.

212. The surveyor has marked the guttering defect as requiring
urgent repair, considering that the water pouring down the wall is
likely to lead to further damage and compromise the
weather-proofing of the building in the short term. Guttering is
also one of the critical elements. As a result of this defect the
dwelling has both
urgent and
critical element disrepair.

213. This section examines in more detail disrepair to critical
elements and its prevalence across tenure, dwelling age band and
location.

214. As shown in
Table 44, in 2016 the proportion of dwellings
which had some disrepair to a critical element(s) was 48%, a three
percentage point drop from 2015. In some of these dwellings,
accounting for 24% of the stock overall, there was also some urgent
disrepair (
Table 45). This represents a four percentage
point drop compared to 2015.

215.
Table 45 also shows the share of dwellings where
in addition to urgent disrepair, some disrepair was assessed as
extensive. This accounted for 3% of the housing stock, a two
percentage point drop on 2015.

6.1.1.1 Dwelling age and location

216. The prevalence of disrepair to critical elements is
associated with age of construction, with dwellings built after
1964 less likely to fall within this category. This is also evident
where instances of critical disrepair co-exist with urgent or
urgent and extensive disrepair, a pattern which has remained
unchanged in the last year.

217. Urban and rural dwellings show similar rates in all
categories of disrepair shown in
Table 45. Urban dwellings have statistically
significant reductions in rates of all disrepair categories between
2015 and 2016.

218. The biggest improvement in 2016 has been for older
dwellings built between 1919 and 1944. Levels of critical disrepair
decreased by 9 percentage points to 58% for these dwellings and
levels of critical and urgent disrepair decreased by 13 percentage
points to 27%.

Table 45: Disrepair to Critical Elements, Urgent and
Extensive Disrepair by Dwelling Age and Location, 2015 and
2016

Age of dwelling

Location

Scotland

pre-1919

1919-1944

1945-1964

1965-1982

post 1982

Urban

Rural

Dwellings with any Critical
Disrepair

2016

67%

58%

60%

48%

20%

48%

49%

48%

2015

68%

67%

60%

49%

26%

52%

51%

52%

Dwellings with Critical and Urgent
disrepair

2016

37%

27%

30%

22%

9%

24%

25%

24%

2015

39%

40%

35%

25%

10%

28%

27%

28%

Dwellings with Critical, Urgent
& Extensive disrepair

2016

5%

3%

5%

2%

1%

3%

2%

3%

2015

8%

7%

6%

3%

1%

5%

4%

5%

6.1.1.2 Tenure

219. Levels of critical disrepair are similar for the private
and the social housing sector considered as a whole. Just under
half of all dwellings (48% in the private and 49% in the social
sector) have some disrepair to critical elements. Just under a
quarter of dwellings have both critical and urgent disrepair (24%
for both private and social sector) and a very small proportion (3%
in the private and 4% in social sector) also have instances of
extensive disrepair in addition to critical and urgent.

220. However, the sectors are not homogenous. Housing
associations dwellings have the lowest levels of both critical and
critical and urgent disrepair. They are followed by owner occupied
dwellings, while
LA properties and
private rented properties have the highest levels of disrepair in
these categories.

221. Scotland rates across all types of disrepair categories
have undergone statistically significant reductions. The biggest
changes between 2015 and 2016 is the reduction in dwellings in the
LA sector with critical
and urgent disrepair from 37% to 30%.

222. As shown in
Figure 30, although some disrepair to critical elements is fairly
common it tends to be at a relatively low level in each property,
affecting on average no more than 3% of the relevant area. A full
list of elements in this category is provided in
section 7.8.7.3.

223. Wall finish and roof coverings are often affected. Around
26% of dwellings had some disrepair to wall finish and 16% had some
disrepair to roof coverings; however, in both cases the disrepair
covered no more than 2.5% of the area on average. Where stone
pointing, render or harling on walls is damaged, moisture can seep
into the structure of the walls and cause further damage. Similarly
slipped roof tiles or slates can allow water to access the roof
structure or the tops of internal walls.

224. Around 21% of dwellings with chimneys showed some signs of
disrepair. Unchecked this can lead to water ingress and eventually
falling masonry.

Figure 30: The Number of Households (
HHs) Affected and Average
(Median) Extent of Disrepair to External Critical Elements

* Av. Extent has been suppressed for some categories due to
small sample sizes

6.1.2 Damp and Condensation

225. The definitions of damp and condensation are provided in
section 7.8.

226. Any condensation, rising or penetrating damp recorded in
the
SHCS can
cover anything from a small damp patch or area of condensation on a
single wall in one room (caused for example by ineffective
ventilation whilst cooking) to prevalence throughout a dwelling, so
does not indicate a serious housing quality issue in all cases.

227. The incidence of these defects in isolation and together is
given in
Table 47. Around 89% of all dwellings in 2016
were free from any form of condensation or damp. This is similar to
both 2014 and 2015 levels.

228. In 2016 3.7% of the housing stock (around 91,000 dwellings)
suffered from some degree of penetrating damp, a slight increase on
2015 (2.4%). There were a very small number of properties with
rising damp in the survey sample, suggesting that their share in
the housing stock is less than 1%.

229. Condensation was observed in 8.5% of the surveyed stock
(equivalent to around 209,000 dwellings) which is similar to 2015
levels.

230. In 1% of dwellings (26,000) both condensation and some form
of damp were recorded. This level has not changed significantly in
the previous five years.

Table 47: Presence of Damp and/or Condensation in
2014-2016.

2016

2015

2014

Defect

000s

%

000s

%

000s

%

No Damp or Condensation

2,171

88.6%

2,179

89.5%

2,144

88.6%

Condensation

209

8.5%

214

8.8%

226

9.3%

Penetrating damp

91

3.7%

58

2.4%

67

2.8%

Rising damp

10

0.4%

3

0.1%

11

0.5%

Condensation and any damp

26

1.0%

20

0.8%

24

1.0%

Total

2,452

2,434

2,420

Sample

2,850

2,754

2,682

6.2 Housing Quality Standards

Levels of compliance with the tolerable standard in 2016
remained similar to 2015: 2% (or 39,000) of all dwellings fell
below the Tolerable Standard. Longer term this represents an
improvement of 2 percentage points since 2012.

The Scottish Housing Quality Standard (
SHQS) failure
rate in the social sector was 38%, not allowing for abeyances and
exemptions, no change from 2015. This has fallen from 60% in
2010. 26% of properties did not meet the Energy Efficient
criterion.

SHCS
surveyors may not always be able to identify the presence of
cavity wall insulation. The overall
SHQS
failure rate in the social sector would be 26% if it is assumed
that all social dwellings have insulated cavity walls where this
is technically feasible.

The majority of dwellings falling below the
SHQS
failed on a single criterion; this accounted for more than 8 out
of 10 failures in the social sector.

For 7 out of 10 social homes failing the
SHQS
this was due to falling short on a single one of the 55 elements
which make up the standard. Most frequently these were cavity
wall insulation, pipe and tank insulation, presence of at least
six electrical sockets in the kitchen, secure external doors,
adequate food storage and secure front and rear access to
dwellings in common block.

231. Two quality standards are set by the Scottish Government
and monitored through the Scottish House Condition Survey.

232. The
Tolerable Standard is a "condemnatory" standard.
In other words, it is not reasonable to expect people to continue
to live in a house that falls below it. For more information on the
Tolerable Standard see
section 7.8.9.

233. The
Scottish Housing Quality Standard (
SHQS)
was introduced in February 2004
[45]. It means social landlords must make sure their tenants' homes
are in a good state of repair, energy efficient, healthy, safe and
secure. A target was agreed that all social landlords must ensure
that all their dwellings pass the
SHQS
by April 2015. Private owners and private landlords are currently
under no obligation to bring their properties up to this standard.
However
SHCS
collects the same data for all dwellings to allow comparison across
the housing stock. Since 2012 this target has been incorporated in
the Scottish Social Housing Charter and the performance of
landlords has been monitored by the independent Scottish Housing
Regulator (
SHR).

235. The overall level of compliance with the tolerable standard
remained similar to 2015. As shown in
Table 48, 2% of all dwellings (or 39,000
dwellings) fell below the tolerable standard in 2016. However there
is a longer term trend of improvement and 2016 levels represent a
drop of 2 percentage points since 2012.

236. The share of dwellings below tolerable standard in the
private sectors was 2%. This is similar to 2015 but around 2 points
better than 2012 when 4% of all dwellings fell below tolerable
standard.

237. There was no change since 2015 in the social sector where
around 1% of dwellings were below tolerable standard.

238. The rate for the private rented sector in 2016 was 2% and
has remained broadly at the same level for the last 6 years.
However, while in 2015 we found that
PRS dwellings were
more likely to fall below tolerable standard than owner occupied
dwellings or those in the social sector, this gap is no longer
observed in the
SHCS
sample for 2016.

239. The proportion of pre-1919 dwellings below tolerable
standard has declined since 2013 by around 4 percentage points and
stood at 4% in 2016. This however still exceeds the levels of
BTS recorded
for the most recently built dwellings (post 1965), at under 1%.

240. The tolerable standard consists of 12 criteria (listed in
section 7.8.9), failure on one of which
leads to a failure overall.

were not free from rising/penetrating damp (17,000 or 43% of
BTS
dwellings);

were not satisfactorily insulated (9,000 or 24% of
BTS
dwellings);

were not structurally stable (4,000 or 11% of
BTS
dwellings).

had unsatisfactory provision for lighting, ventilation or
heating (4,000 or 10% of
BTS
dwellings).

6.2.2 Scottish Housing Quality Standard (
SHQS)

242. In this section we present the results of analysis of the
SHCS
with regards to compliance with the Scottish Housing Quality
Standard (
SHQS).
The
SHQS
provides a common standard for assessing the condition of Scottish
housing. For this reason, although the requirement to comply with
SHQS
applies only to social sector housing, we assess all tenures for
comparison.

243. The
SHQS
is made up of 55 different elements grouped into 5 higher-level
criteria: Tolerable Standard (A), Serious Disrepair (B), Energy
Efficiency (C), Modern Facilities and Services (D) and Healthy,
Safe and Secure (E)
[46]. In the
SHCS
each of the 55 individual elements is assessed by surveyors trained
to collect detailed information on housing characteristics. This
information is subsequently aggregated by Scottish Government
analysts into higher level measures for each of the 5 criteria and
the standard overall.

244. Table 49 shows the overall results for the Scottish housing
stock for 2016 and the previous 6 years. In 2016, 44.7% of all
dwellings failed to meet the
SHQS,
no difference compared to 2015 but down from 61% in 2010. As in
previous years, the highest failure rate was with respect to the
Energy Efficient criterion (32.8%), followed by Healthy, Safe and
Secure (12.4%) and Modern Facilities (8.6%). There were a very
small number of dwellings which did not meet the
BTS criterion
(1.6%) or the Disrepair criterion (0.1%). Differences from 2015 on
all criteria shown in Table 49 and overall are within the margin of
error for this survey.

(r) These figures have been revised from the previous
publication in order to correct for an error identified in
compiling the failure rate for the Energy Efficient criterion
relating to 2015, which also affect the overall
SHQS
failure rate for 2015.
Notes: 1. Figures for 2014-2016 are not fully comparable to
previous years. For details see Technical Notes and Definitions

6.2.2.1 Compliance by Tenure, Dwelling Age and
Location

245.
Table 50 shows the number and proportion of
properties failing the
SHQS
by selected characteristics.

246. The lowest failure rates are in the newest dwellings
(post-1982, 20% fail) and in Housing Associations stock (29% fail).
As previously shown (
section 2.5.2), Housing Association
dwellings are often newer than Local Authority stock and are built
to a higher energy efficiency standard. The newest purpose-build
social housing in Scotland is also likely to be designed to comply
with
SHQS.

247. The overall
SHQS
failure rate for social sector housing in 2016 stood at 38%. If it
is assumed that all social dwellings have insulated cavity walls
where this is technically feasible, the overall
SHQS
failure rate in the social sector would be 26% (see
section 6.2.2.4).
SHCS
based measures do not make an allowance for abeyances and
exemptions.

248. The 5 point reduction in the
SHQS
failure rate for older, pre-1919 properties is within the margin of
error for this survey. The differences between 2015 and 2016 for
urban areas and for rural areas are also within the margin of
error.

Table 50: Number and Proportion of Dwellings Failing
SHQS, 2015
and 2016

2016

2015 (r)

000s

% fail

Sample

000s

% fail

Sample

All Scotland

1,097

45%

2,850

1,106

45%

2,754

Tenure

Owned outright

406

51%

988

368

48%

929

Mortgaged

277

40%

802

323

44%

811

LA

159

45%

419

154

46%

380

HA/co-op

78

29%

297

76

30%

279

PRS

176

53%

344

184

54%

355

Private

859

47%

2,134

875

47%

2,095

Social

237

38%

716

230

39%

659

Dwelling Age

pre-1919

238

49%

529

265

54%

489

1919-1944

165

57%

330

169

62%

321

1945-1964

279

53%

640

271

52%

608

1965-1982

293

55%

627

296

54%

644

post-1982

122

20%

724

104

18%

692

Location

Urban

888

43%

2,189

906

45%

2,147

Rural

209

51%

661

200

48%

607

(r) Figures relating to 2015 have been revised from the previous
publication in order to correct for an error identified in
compiling the failure rate for the Energy Efficient criterion, also
affecting the overall
SHQS
failure rate.

6.2.2.2 Individual
SHQS
Criteria

249.
Table 51 shows the failure rates for each
criterion of the
SHQS
for private and social sector housing since 2010. It demonstrates
that there has been a consistent trend of improvement in both the
private and the social sector. However the survey sample is not
large enough to measure accurately year-on-year change in each
instance. All differences between 2015 and 2016 shown in
Table 51 are within the survey margin of
error.

250. The
SHCS
estimates that 38% of social sector housing failed to meet the
SHQS
in 2016. This was predominantly due to the Energy Efficient
criterion, 26% of properties failed on this measure. Nine per cent
failed the Healthy, Safe and Secure criterion and 8% failed the
Modern Facilities criterion. The share of those not meeting the
BTS or the
Disrepair criterion was negligible.

Table 51:
SHQS
Criteria Failure Rates by Tenure, 2010-2016

2016
1

2015
1

2014
1

2013

2012

2011

2010

All tenures

SHQS
Overall

45%

45% (r)

47%

49%

54%

58%

61%

Below Tolerable Standard

2%

2%

2%

3%

4%

3%

4%

Serious Disrepair

0%

0%

0%

0%

0%

1%

1%

Not Energy Efficient

33%

34% (r)

35%

36%

42%

46%

49%

Lacking Modern Facilities/Services

9%

9%

11%

11%

12%

14%

16%

Not Healthy, Safe or Secure

12%

13%

14%

14%

16%

17%

17%

Private

SHQS
Overall

47%

47% (r)

48%

51%

55%

60%

61%

Below Tolerable Standard

2%

2%

2%

3%

4%

4%

4%

Serious Disrepair

0%

0%

0%

0%

0%

1%

1%

Not Energy Efficient

35%

36% (r)

37%

39%

43%

49%

51%

Lacking Modern Facilities/Services

9%

9%

11%

11%

11%

13%

13%

Not Healthy, Safe or Secure

14%

14%

14%

14%

17%

17%

17%

Social

SHQS
Overall

38%

39% (r)

45%

43%

52%

52%

60%

Below Tolerable Standard

1%

1%

1%

3%

3%

1%

2%

Serious Disrepair

-

-

0%

0%

0%

0%

0%

Not Energy Efficient

26%

27% (r)

30%

28%

39%

37%

44%

Lacking Modern Facilities/Services

8%

8%

12%

12%

15%

15%

22%

Not Healthy, Safe or Secure

9%

10%

14%

13%

13%

15%

16%

(r) These figures have been revised from the previous
publication in order to correct for an error identified in
compiling the failure rate for the Energy Efficient criterion
relating to 2015, which also affect the overall
SHQS
failure rate for 2015.

Notes: 1. Figures for 2014-2016 are not fully comparable to
previous years.

6.2.2.3 Number of Criteria and Elements Failing

251. In the large majority of cases failure to meet the
SHQS
is due to a dwelling not passing one criterion or even a single
element. As the standard incorporates 55 different elements, it is
generally sufficient for a dwelling to fail on a single one of
these in order to be considered not satisfying the higher level
criterion requirement and the
SHQS
overall
[47].

252. Table 52 and
Table 53 present the distribution of dwellings
for Scotland as a whole and social housing separately by number of
criteria failed. The majority of failures in 2016 were due to a
single criterion: 35% of dwellings in the whole stock and 33% of
social sector dwellings failed the
SHQS
because of a single criterion. This constitutes respectively 79%
(for all housing) and 85% (for social sector) of all dwellings
falling below the
SHQS.
In 2010 the corresponding figure was 68% for both the social sector
and the whole housing stock. Therefore over time, alongside the
reduction in the overall failure rate, there has also been a
reduction in the reasons why a dwelling does not meet the
standard.

Table 52: Number and Proportion of Dwellings by Numbers
of
SHQS
Criteria Failures, All Housing, 2010, 2013-2016

Number of Criteria Fail

2016

2015 (r)

2014

2013

2010

000s

Col %

000s

Col %

000s

Col %

000s

Col %

000s

Col %

None

1,355

55%

1,328

55%

1,271

53%

1,222

51%

920

39%

1

867

35%

843

35%

865

36%

880

37%

980

42%

2

202

8%

226

9%

227

9%

236

10%

352

15%

3+

28

1%

37

2%

58

2%

64

3%

106

4%

Total Dwellings

2,452

100%

2,434

100%

2,420

100%

2,402

100%

2,357

100%

Criteria Fails as % of All assessed

11%

12%

12%

13%

17%

Sample size

2,850

2,754

2,682

2,725

3,115

(r) Figures relating to 2015 have been revised from the previous
publication in order to correct for an error identified in
compiling the failure rate for the Energy Efficient criterion, also
affecting the overall
SHQS
failure rate.

Table 53: Number and Proportion of Dwellings by Numbers
of
SHQS
Criteria Failures, Social Dwellings, 2010-2016

Number of Criteria Failing

2016

2015 (r)

2014

2013

2010

000s

Col %

000s

Col %

000s

Col %

000s

Col %

000s

Col %

None

385

62%

359

61%

347

55%

344

57%

252

40%

1

202

33%

191

32%

216

34%

201

33%

257

41%

2

35

6%

35

6%

54

9%

51

8%

95

15%

3+

-

-

4

1%

10

2%

13

2%

29

5%

Total Dwellings

622

100%

589

100%

627

100%

608

100%

633

100%

Criteria Fails as % of All Assessed

9%

9%

11%

11%

17%

Sample size

716

659

673

662

798

(r) Figures relating to 2015 have been revised from the previous
publication in order to correct for an error identified in
compiling the failure rate for the Energy Efficient criterion, also
affecting the overall
SHQS
failure rate.

Table 54. Number and Proportion of Social Sector
Dwellings by Number of
SHQS
Element Failures, and Most Common Single-Element Failures,
2016

Number of Element Failures

000s

% of All Dwellings

% of Failing Dwellings

None

385

62%

1 element

170

27%

72%

…
of which

Cavity wall insulation (C31)

77

Pipe and tank insulation (C33)

19

At least six kitchen sockets (D39)

12

Secure external doors (E53)

10

Adequate food storage space (D40)

10

Safe common front and rear doors (E55)

7

2 elements

47

8%

20%

3 or more elements

20

3%

8%

Subtotal: dwellings failing the
SHQS

237

100%

All social sector dwellings

622

100%

Sample size

716

253.
Table 54 shows the distribution of social sector
dwellings by the number of elements failed. Nearly three quarters
(72%) of dwellings failing the
SHQS
did so because of a single element, and another fifth (20%) failed
because of 2 elements. The elements most likely to cause failure
(as there are no other reasons to fail the
SHQS
in these dwellings) are cavity wall insulation, pipe and tank
insulation, presence of at least six electrical sockets in the
kitchen, external doors to dwellings with adequate locks, presence
of a minimum of 1m
3 food storage in the kitchen, and secure front and rear
access to dwellings in common block (
Table 54).

6.2.2.4
SHQS
Compliance and Cavity Wall Insulation

254. The
SHQS
target is incorporated into the Scottish Social Housing Charter and
the independent Scottish Housing Regulator (
SHR) is
responsible for monitoring social landlords' progress towards the
target. The latest
SHQS
progress update was published by the
SHR in August
2017
[48]. It reported that 94% of social homes met the
SHQS
in 2016/17.

255. There are some differences between the
SHR and the
SHCS
survey in the way data for assessing the
SHQS
is collected and reported which make the headline compliance rates
not immediately comparable. Abeyances and exemptions are not taken
into account by the
SHCS as
it is not feasible to collect this kind of information in the
survey.

256. One potential source of difference relates to the ability
of the survey to detect the presence of cavity wall insulation (
CWI) in all
cases. According to feedback from social landlords, cavity wall
insulation is installed as standard where there is a suitable
cavity, and in most other cases external or internal insulation is
considered (although this is not required for
SHQS).
This is because
CWI is recognised
throughout the sector as a relatively low cost measure with a high
impact on energy efficiency.

257. However, the survey still records uninsulated cavity wall
properties, and to allow for the possibility that
SHCS
surveyors may not always be able to identify the presence of
CWI we provide an
alternative estimate of
SHQS
compliance (Table 55). This estimate assumes that all social
dwellings have insulated cavity walls where this is technically
appropriate. Where it is not appropriate we assume an exemption.
Therefore this alternative measure of compliance assumes that no
dwelling fails the
SHQS
for lack of
CWI. Although
this is an unlikely scenario, it illustrates the maximum impact
that undercounting
CWI in the survey
could potentially be making on the measurement of
SHQS
compliance in the social sector.

Table 55 Number and Proportion of Dwellings in the Social
Sector Failing the Energy Efficient Criterion and
SHQS
Overall, With and Without the Cavity Wall Insulation (
CWI) Element,
2015 (revised) and 2016

Dwellings Failing the Energy Efficient
Criterion

Dwellings Failing the
SHQS
Overall

000s

%

000s

%

2016

inc.
CWI
element

159

26%

237

38%

exc.
CWI
element

68

11%

160

26%

Difference

-91

-15 pts

-77

-12 pts

2015(r)

inc.
CWI
element

159

27%

237

39%

exc.
CWI
element

68

12%

160

26%

Difference

-91

-15 pts

-77

-13 pts

258. In 2016, almost one fifth of social dwellings (17% or
107,000 dwellings) are recorded as failing the
CWI element of
the
SHQS.
Excluding this element from the compliance requirement leads to a
15 percentage point reduction in the energy efficiency element
failure rate and a 12 percentage point reduction in
SHQS
failure. This amounts to around 77,000 fewer social sector
dwellings failing the
SHQS
and an overall
SHQS
failure rate of 26%.

6.3 Overcrowding and Under-Occupancy

In 2016 around 67,000 households lived in overcrowded
accommodation (3%) under the bedroom standard.

Around 912,000 (37%) households had one bedroom in excess of
the minimum requirement under the bedroom standard. A further
777,000 (32%) households had two or more bedrooms in excess.

Social sector tenants are more likely to live in
accommodation which is at the level meeting the minimum
requirements of the bedroom standard (52% compared to 20% in the
private sector) but social and private tenants are as likely to
live in overcrowded accommodation (3% respectively).

259. This section examines some key measures of whether
households are living in overcrowded conditions or under-occupancy.
This is determined on the basis of the bedroom standard as defined
in the Housing (Overcrowding) Bill 2003
[49] taking into account the number of bedrooms available in the
dwelling and the type of the household that occupies it.

260. Minimum requirements for bedrooms under the bedroom
standard should not be confused with criteria for the removal of
the spare room subsidy. More information on the bedroom standard
and the differences between the two is included in
section 7.8.8.

261.
Figure 31 and
Table 56 show how headline occupancy measures
have changed over time. There was no significant change in these
headline measures between 2015 and 2016. In 2016, the national rate
of households with at least one bedroom above the minimum standard
was 69%. The rate of overcrowding has stayed stable since 2009
(3%), and is lower than the peak observed in 2004/5 (4%).

262. Subsequent sections examine in more detail differences
across household and dwelling characteristics for 2015 and the
preceding year.

Figure 31: Proportion of Dwellings Which are Overcrowded,
Meet the Minimum Standard, Exceed it by 1 Bedroom or Exceed by 2
or More Bedrooms, 2003/4-2016

Table 56: Dwellings Which Are Below The Standard, Meet
The Minimum Requirement, Or Exceed It By 1, 2 Or + bedrooms,
2010, 2015, 2016

Bedroom Standard

2016

2015

2010

000s

%

000s

%

000s

%

Below Standard

67

3%

70

3%

61

3%

Compliance: minimum requirements

695

28%

749

31%

644

27%

Above Standard

1,690

69%

1,615

66%

1,652

70%

1 bedroom above minimum

912

37%

900

37%

898

38%

2+ bedrooms above minimum

777

32%

715

29%

754

32%

2 bedrooms above minimum

560

23%

503

21%

543

23%

3 or more bedrooms above minimum

217

9%

211

9%

211

9%

Total

2,452

100%

2,434

100%

2,402

100%

Sample Size

2,850

2,754

3,115

6.3.1 Overcrowding

263. A dwelling is considered overcrowded if there are
insufficient bedrooms to meet the occupants' requirements under the
bedroom standard definition (see
section 7.8.8).

264. Around 3%, or 67,000 households, lived in overcrowded
accommodation in 2016. There was no difference overall between
social and private sector dwellings in overcrowding, both also
having a rate of 3%. However, there was a 4 percentage point drop
in overcrowded households who rent from their local authority,
compared to 2015 (from 6% to 1%).

Table 57: Overcrowding by Tenure and Housing Type,
Dwelling Age Band, Income Band and Location, 2015 and
2016

Overcrowded under Bedroom Standard

2016

2015

000s

%

Sample

000s

%

Sample

Tenure

Owned

9

1%

988

7

1%

929

Mortgaged

15

2%

802

18

2%

811

LA

5

1%

419

19

6%

380

HA

15

6%

297

10

4%

279

PRS

23

7%

344

16

5%

355

Private

48

3%

2,134

41

2%

2,095

Social

20

3%

716

29

5%

659

Age of dwelling

pre-1919

9

2%

529

18

4%

489

1919-1944

8

3%

330

*

*

321

1945-1964

14

3%

640

24

5%

608

1965-1982

14

3%

627

12

2%

644

post-1982

22

4%

724

12

2%

692

Dwelling Type

Detached

*

*

767

*

*

692

Semi-detached

9

2%

606

12

3%

594

Terraced

18

3%

620

13

3%

626

Tenement

24

4%

506

30

5%

506

Other flats

14

4%

351

11

3%

336

Weekly Household Income

< £200

5

2%

355

11

4%

328

£200-300

10

2%

506

9

2%

475

£300-400

16

4%

436

20

5%

463

£400-500

4

2%

312

4

2%

322

£500-700

11

3%

516

13

3%

480

£700+

14

2%

669

10

2%

640

Location

urban

58

3%

2,189

63

3%

2,147

rural

9

2%

661

7

2%

607

Scotland

67

3%

2,850

70

3%

2,754

265. Households who own their properties outright and those in
the local authority sector had below the average national
overcrowding rate.

6.3.2 Under-Occupancy

266. In 2016 around 912,000 (37%) had one additional bedroom
above the minimum under the bedroom standard. 777,000 (32%)
households had two or more bedrooms in excess of the minimum
standard.

267. In 2016, there were both differences and similarities
between residents in private housing and the social housing sector
for different measures of under-occupancy. Social sector tenants
are more likely to live in accommodation which is at the level
meeting the minimum requirements of the bedroom standard (52%
compared to 20% in the private sector). In contrast, households in
the social housing sector are less likely to have two or more
bedrooms in excess of the minimum requirements: 9% have two or more
additional rooms, compared to 40% of private sector households.
However, rates of social and private sector households with just
one bedroom in excess of minimum requirements (36% and 38%
respectively) are similar.

268. There are also differences within the private sector. Those
households which own outright (52%) or are mortgaged (36%) are more
likely to have at least 2 additional rooms than those renting in
the private sector (16%).

269. Higher income households (£700+ per week) are more
likely to live in dwellings with additional bedrooms. Of them, 46%
have two or more additional bedrooms.

270. Under-occupied dwellings are more common among the oldest
(pre-1919) and the newest properties (post-82), where 37% of both
groups had two or more bedrooms in excess of the bedroom standard.
Similarly, detached houses have the highest rates of
under-occupancy compared to other building types: 65% with two or
more additional bedrooms.

271. Under-occupation is more common in rural areas. 47% of
rural dwellings have two or more bedrooms in excess of the minimum
requirements under the bedroom standard, compared to 29% for urban
properties; however rates for only one bedroom above the minimum
standard are similar between rural and urban properties.

272. Changes from 2015 on the measures shown in
Table 58 and
Table 59 are mostly within the margin of error
for this survey. An increase of eight percentage points in the
proportion of housing association households with one bedroom above
the minimum was recorded in 2016; this coincided with a 7
percentage point increase overall for households in the social
sector with one bedroom above the minimum standard and an
equivalent reduction in households in the social sector meeting the
standard. These particular under-occupancy rates are similar to
pre-2015 rates.

273. Longer term, the proportion of social dwellings with two or
more additional bedrooms has dropped 4 percentage points, from 13%
in 2011 to 9% in 2016. In the same period the proportion of social
sector households at the minimum bedroom standard has increased
from 46% to 59% in 2015 and then decreased to 52% in 2016.